Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/04/24
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Tim I read the same article and that's the impression that I seemed to have. ernie On Thursday, April 24, 2003, at 01:30 PM, Tim Atherton wrote: > >> This is sure to be splitting hairs but what is the point of having >> less >> grain in Tri X? As someone already pointed out - maybe BD, it is the >> film's 'signature' grain that makes it TriX - otherwise call it non - >> T >> Grain Tmax. Does anyone on the list know Kodak's reason for this new >> TriX? Is it just that this is what they can produce in their new >> plant and >> they are trying to dupe us into thinking this is an improved TriX - >> what >> was wrong with the old TriX. Sorry for the rant. >> >> Ernie HP5+ Nitka > > My understanding (mainly from discussions on the LF list and info from > some > people who are based in Rochester who have various links to Kodak) is > that > it's basically a "side" effect of the new modern coating/film making > facility. > > I'm not a film techie, but what I've been told is, it's the same old > film > formulations we know and love - i.e. the emulsion coating, but when > it's > applied to the new base (or maybe the way it's applied in the new > facility) > you get a somewhat different resulting end product. > > The testing in Photo Techniques seemed to show that one or two films > remained almost identical, while others changed (and in the testers > opinion, > some for the better and some for the worse). > > So - IT IS Tri-X emulsion - but the new base gives it a different > characteristic. (and my understand is that changes like this have > happened > before over the life of Tri-X and other films - it's just the changes > were > not as obvious. Ilford, for example, renamed HP5 as HP5 Plus when a big > change took place. But I remember talking to them at the time and they > pointed out that HP5 just before it changed to "Plus" and HP5 when it > first > came out were somewhat different anyway - the changes had just been > more > gradual). And, of course, Kodak have changed the name of the product > slightly to reflect this, though not as obviously as putting a "Plus" > after > it. > > Now I'd better seen if I haven't thrown that magazine out to make sure > I'm > not completely mistaken... > > > > tim > > -- > To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html > - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html